Search This Blog

Sunday, September 24, 2017

When we see the design in living things and want to know how they have their characteristics, we have to think small. Very small, but with big concepts, all the way down to the molecular level. It's a matter of information. DNA, RNA, chromosomes, and so on are communicating information to not only in the building of an organism, but to keep it going. The information must have a source.

Those believing in muck-to-man evolution are constantly dealing with the source and uses of information in living things. They try and fail to conjure up plausible origin of life scenarios, including the desperate "RNA world" for self-replicating systems concept, and then try to explain how living things are encoded with the ability to self-adapt to changing situations. They don't give us anything real to hang our hats on in their efforts to deny the reality of our Creator who gave us life.

The greatest challenge for evolutionary biology is to account for the information found in codes in DNA, RNA, proteins, and more recently in the epigenome. The mutation/selection mechanism of neo-Darwinism, although still taught in biology textbooks, has been shown inadequate by creation and intelligent design scientists. Indeed, even some leading evolutionists are seeking alternative mechanisms such as self-organization. Much evidence has been found against neo-Darwinism (and all related stochastic processes) and for intelligent design (ID) in recent years. Intelligent design advocates have found ways to detect design. Much evidence has been found against the macroevolution of Homo sapiens and for the biblical origin of mankind.

Evolutionists must account for the origin of life, the Cambrian Explosion in the fossil record, living fossils, the lack of transitional forms, the origin of sexuality, the origin of consciousness, the origin of information in macroevolution, the origin of irreducibly complex molecular machines, convergent evolution, and the information found in the epigenome.

To read the rest, click on "The Origin of Information in Biology".Information is vital to the origin, design, and function of living things. Believers in muck-to-man evolution are unable to present plausible ideas and models for these things, yet they persist in denying the obvious evidence of our Creator's work.

Used under Fair Use provisions for educational purposesClick for larger

Yet, creationists are censored in the public arena, so we need to set up our own areas so our side of the story can be told — which often includes information that secularists do not want known because it threatens evolutionism. Interesting that those decrying "censorship" ignore real censorship against creationary scientists. Essentially, they want their pie, and they want a big chunk of ours, too! Quite a bit of effort to silence the opposition to promote "science" and deny the reality of the Creator, isn't it?The well-heeled evolutionary science industry promotes and protects their worldview, and they don't cotton to actually seeking and spreading truth. Let's look at an example of hypocrisy and non-science from the evolution industry.

When your view has been falsified by evidence but you prohibit other views, you are not engaged in truth-based inquiry.

In a book review in Science, Marcos Huerta enjoys a fact-free suggestion about the Cambrian Explosion he found in Wallace Arthur’s new book of sweeping generalities about evolution, Life through Time and Space. Shutting his eyes to fossil data, he switches on his imagination:

Advocates of evolutionism disingenuously say that they want to search for the truth, then shut out creationary scientists and ID advocates. Then they hypocritically complain about "censorship" while approving of scientific censorship in their favor: they want their pie, and they want ours as well.

Sunday, September 10, 2017

In AD 79. an eruption of Mt. Vesuvius suddenly wiped out the inhabitants of the Roman town of Pompeii, among others. That bad boy has not remained silent, and could be devastating to the 3,000,000 people in the area, who ignored the idea of not living near an active volcano. Didn't work for people in 79. (Useless trivia: Pompeii is pronounced pom-PAY, but a small community in Gratiot County, Michigan has the same spelling, and locals pronounce it POM-pay-eye. I was laughed at for using that pronunciation because as a kid, I lived near there, and did not know the real way.) So anyway, the tons of ash that fell on Pompeii was an effective preservative, and archaeologists have made many interesting discoveries.

Apostate clergyman Steve Chalke, who denies original sin in Genesis 3 and affirms the Pelagian heresy, believes that "erotic art" excavated by archaeologists at Pompeii refutes established Christian understandings of Paul's teachings about homosexuality. How Chalke diagrams his logic on the blackboard is unknown. He is joining in with other owlhoots who say that in Romans 1, Paul was only speaking of sexual abuse, but thought that same-sex "marriage" was acceptable. Such a claim impugns the integrity of God, the establishment of marriage in Genesis, its affirmation by Jesus, and implies that God is willing to let people misunderstand his word for 2,000 years.

In a recent lecture, a professing evangelical pastor in the UK, Steve Chalke argued1 that ancient erotic art from Pompeii, an ancient Roman town buried by a volcanic eruption in AD 79, shows that “New Testament verses that are used routinely to label same-sex activity as sinful were, in fact” not doing so.

Christians “Throw Bible Verses Around Without . . . Context”

Chalke reportedly asserted that “because of widespread ignorance of the ancient world and Graeco-Roman culture in churches across the West, we throw Bible verses around without understanding their context.” These pieces of explicit artwork supposedly provide the context to show that the New Testament is “condemning the abusive and exploitative sexual activity common in the world that Paul’s recipients lived in” rather than forbidding “faithful gay relationships” among Christians.

Sunday, September 03, 2017

It's natural for parents to try to shield their children from harmful things, but that can to too far and turn into "smother love". Some Christian parents have the incorrect notion that their kids should never learn about evolution. That's unrealistic, since the owlhoots at the Darwin Ranch control government-run indoctrination centers (schools), the media, secular science, public opinion, and much more. They're going to learn about it, so what can Bible-believing parents do?

Out there in the real world (with a passel of help from the internet), there are sidewinders who actively attack God, the Bible, the Resurrection, creation, and other Christian beliefs. They will selectively cite data, misquote the Bible, use fake science (such as the "Canaanites disprove the Bible" fiasco or the "family tomb of Jesus" nonsense), and especially evolution. Evolution is foundational to atheism and many (if not most) secularist views.Other attacks on our faith can be investigated and dealt with (often by simply waiting for more information), so let's focus on evolution. Christians need to be proactive. We know kids are going to learn about evolution, and some parents teach it to their own children. The difference is that the wise parent will teach it properly. In schools and such, the sanitized version of evolution is given, where flaws in the theory are ignored, and fanciful tales are presented as if they were science.Take the kids to the natural history museums, and show them just how unnatural they are. As before, stories are presented as facts, our putative evolutionary apelike ancestors have suspiciously human-looking eyes when noscientist has any idea what the eyes actually looked like, so people are seeing opinions presented as scientific fact. I've read about parents and Christian teachers that took children to museums, and they troubled the guides' propaganda by raising points and asking questions.Schools are dreadful at teaching critical thinking skills nowadays, and creation science ministries emphasize those skills. When presented with claims, the properly educated student or adult can ask probing questions, consider the theory of knowledge behind the claims, realize that most evolutionists have a materialist atheistic worldview that rejects facts that they dislike, and so on. We can prepare children for the lies they are going to be told, and how to deal with them.

Some parents are afraid that teaching their children unbiblical ideas like evolution or atheistic arguments would cause them to stumble in their faith, but the opposite is true. Our children are going to be exposed to evolution whether we like it or not. It’s not a matter of ‘if’; it’s a matter of ‘when’. Knowing this, one of the best things we can do for our children is to teach them unbiblical ideas, or in short, how the world thinks. Because if we do not, others will provide seeming explanations that might seem more plausible.

Question Evolution Day

TheReligionofPeace.com

Contributors

The best thing to give to your enemy is forgiveness; to an opponent, tolerance; to a friend, your heart; to your child, a good example; to a father, deference; to your mother, conduct that will make her proud of you; to yourself, respect; to all men, charity.Francis Maitland Balfour

The ultimate determinate in the struggle now going on for the world will not be bombs and rockets but a test of wills and ideas – a trial of spiritual resolve; the values we hold, the beliefs we cherish and the ideas to which we are dedicated — Ronald Reagan

What is the network dealio?

Professional contact information

Please email radarbinder@comcast.net to contact me professionally. I consult and sell software, hardware and services to companies, organizations and government entities throughout North America.

The best thing to give to your enemy is forgiveness; to an opponent, tolerance; to a friend, your heart; to your child, a good example; to a father, deference; to your mother, conduct that will make her proud of you; to yourself, respect; to all men, charity.Francis Maitland Balfour